Benicia City Council approves grant allocations on community projects

BENICIA &GT;&GT; In a 3-2 split decision Tuesday night, the Benicia City Council approved staff recommendations on the allocation of grants to fund community projects.

Per the approval, all of the 13 submitted projects will be approved for funding, except for the Community Sustainability Commission's Water and Energy Conservation project, due to lack of money in the account. The project was recommended to receive $715,301.58, and was deferred for other funding options in the future.

The approved recommendation also added $300,000 to the initially recommended $200,000 grant for the Benicia Resource Incentives Program, which city staff said "is an award winning program that has not only achieved measurable green house gas reductions, but assisted the city in its economic development efforts by reducing operational costs of our manufacturers in the Benicia Industrial Park."

The projects will be funded by the Valero Improvement Project account, a $14 million 2008 settlement between the Good Neighbor Steering Committee and Valero to resolve a dispute over the refinery's environmental impacts. The money is to be used to fund environmentally geared community projects, focusing on water conservation.

Mayor Elizabeth Patterson and Vice Mayor Tom Campbell voted "no."

During the June 17 city council meeting, the council asked Valero to withdraw in writing its Condensate Recovery Phase II project, therefore making $1.6 million, which was previously allocated for the project, available. The project was a point of contention, since city staff maintained that Valero has not met all the requirements to receive the funds, while the refinery insisted that it had. In exchange for the withdrawal, the council then approved $829,000 in grant funds for its Boiler Water Conservation Project, which was one of the submitted applications for the funding.

Valero submitted the withdrawal in writing two days after the meeting.

Patterson, who with Campbell also voted "no" on the June decision, voiced her disapproval on the outcome.

"We are not a company town. We need to respect the process from the beginning to end," she said Tuesday night. "We are a government, and the intent is to fund those who can't afford (the projects) without the grant. ... We have many services that are done by many hardworking people. I really don't agree with awarding a multi-million dollar company for something that will pay for itself."

In addition to the $1.6 million money, which can only be used for water conservation projects, there was also $847,000 in available funds for any other future projects.

After Tuesday night's decision, there's $180,955 left in the formerly CRP II funds, and $298,660 in the future projects funds.

In another business, the council unanimously voted to place a ballot measure in the November election regarding whether the city treasurer position should be appointed, instead of elected. The position has been losing its importance over the years, and received a $200 monthly stipend and retirement benefits.

If the position was an appointed one, it could be included with another city position, the city attorney said.